@Edmond, your stoopidity is simply astounding.
First, it's appropriate (for YOU) that you quoted REM to try to drive home your point, as it's a band named after Rapid Eye Movement, you know, a dream-state condition.
LMFAO!
That pretty much says it all. But here's more to the point(lessness) of your post...
Let's just take chips, as I trust you've heard (?), they've been driving stock markets for about two years now, and what's holding back the market this year. So they are a great place to provide an example of what @rforno succinctly and accurately stated.
Here's some comments on tariffs as they relate to that industry by somebody who has elevated his game beyond wild-eyed investment forum posts.
TRY to understand what he says here. I know it's gonna be virtually impossible for you, but please, do at least TRY.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/06/trump-tariffs-live-updates-businesses-warn-of-ripple-down-effects-from-tariffs-because-of-rising-costs.html
Excerpt: (BOLD added):
Trade uncertainty weighing on chip companies, says ‘Chip War’ author
The semiconductor industry is particularly vulnerable to tariffs due to how globally integrated its supply chains are, according to Chris Miller, Tufts Fletcher Schooler professor and ‘Chip War’ author.
Even if chips are assembled in the U.S., many of the components used are not manufactured in the U.S., Miller noted.
“The complexity of the supply chains makes devising a tariff policy around carve outs very, very difficult, which is why the industry is hoping there won’t be any changes at all — because they’ve been structured around the assumption that you can move goods back and forth across borders without this type of tariff uncertainty,” Miller told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Thursday.
That said, I'm going to stop reading your posts because I'm losing too many brain cells in doing so.

Still, even if you are looking down the barrel of the next Great Depression, history shows us that the market eventually recovers.
But since the path to recovery is so uncertain, the best way to be prepared is by owning a well-diversified portfolio that fits your time horizon and risk tolerance. Investors who stay invested in the market in the long run will reap rewards that make the turmoil worthwhile.

The Trump administration has disbanded two expert committees that advised the government on producing accurate economic statistics. Members of one group, the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee (FESAC), were told Tuesday that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick disbanded the committee last week because its mission “has been fulfilled,” in an email seen by The Wall Street Journal.
The Commerce Department also terminated a second expert group, the Bureau of Economic Analysis Advisory Committee, which consulted on a separate group of economic stats. Both committees’ websites say that coming meetings have been canceled.
A FESAC committee member, economist Erica Groshen, said the group played a critical role in guiding the offices that track U.S. inflation, employment and economic growth. “Its work goes to the essential transparency of these statistical agencies,” Groshen said. “When you remove that transparency, then that diminishes trust.”
FFESACesac guided government statistics for 25 years. High-profile academic economists including Daron Acemoglu, John Taylor and the late Alan Krueger served as some of its past members. Current members included academic economists, think-tank researchers and executives from Wall Street and corporations.
The committees’ dismantling comes at a challenging moment for the government statistics agencies, which have faced tight budgets and falling response rates to surveys that are essential gauges of the health of the economy.
The move also follows a suggestion from Lutnick over the weekend that the government could change how it calculates the size of the economy by separating government spending, which would be a sharp departure from academic theory and international norms.
FESAC met twice a year to advise government statisticians and economists on how to improve and refine their surveys and calculations. Members weren’t paid for their work. Members who chose to attend meetings in person could be compensated for travel expenses.
Groshen, who was previously head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, said FESAC had an especially important role advising on statistics that combine the work of multiple government agencies. That includes the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation metric, the personal-consumption expenditures price index, which melds analysis from both the Labor Department and the Commerce Department.
“These advisory committees are really essential to maintaining the quality of the data going forward,” she said.

@Edmond … in response to your points
1. Scientists around the globe are concerned about climate change. It is not a conspiracy, but based on analyses of facts and measurements. I spent much of my career in air quality. I have personally observed and measured how small concentrations of air pollution can affect the environment and people’s health. Much of the opposition to climate change is funded by fossil fuel companies with vested interests in maintaining the status quo.
2. This is true but context is important. Where I live, conservatives have consistently opposed land use controls to limit development in floodplains, coastal areas. Trump is also cutting funds for the US Forest Service and FEMA. National forests are located all over the US, not just California. I believe we will be experiencing more wildfires in many areas outside the West. Several years ago, we had an exceptionally dry year in North Carolina, and wildfires were occurring across the state.
3. Many areas flooded by hurricanes in North Carolina were well outside floodplains, even 500-year zones. This was true in hurricanes Fran, Floyd, Matthew, Helene and others.